It’s not an “unsubstantiated question”- simply because there is no “statement” that is seeking to be “substantiated”. It’s an attempt by me to better understand the future potential and the diagrams in the most recent announcement are what have piqued my interest in this regard.
The way I am currently interpreting those diagrams in the current announcement (and please tell me if my interpretation is erroneous) is that the first one is a plan view of the deposit showing the angular drill holes, their starting points and the penetrations. They generally start at surface (and many earlier ones outside the surface perimeter of the shown resource area) and penetrate in a NNW direction.
The second diagram is a cross sectional representation at section “7100mN” and shows the drill holes from that section penetrating downwards and angled from the sse to nnw (matching plan view in the first diagram). The third diagram shows section 7300mN in a similar fashion. In diagrams 2 and 3 the red descending lines represent the most recently reported/announced drill holes.
Now, notice in the upper right corner area of diagrams 2 and 3 there are layers of green colour material over the top of the pink material. By my reckoning that means that there is schist overlaying the spod in those areas. To me that suggests that the currently drilled resource starts at surface but extends not directly down but rather angled downward and to the SSE. The “open at depth” indicator likewise indicates the direction of expected continuation of the resource.
I’ve included copies of the images with some yellow outlining to help.
So... aside from stating what hasn’t been said by the current company executives in announcements and in an attempt to properly understand the future potential here, are you able to confirm whether there is “overburden” of schist laying atop expected spod in the SSE direction?
Now the answer here may well be that no-one is talking about any need for underground or overburden removal simply because there is “sufficient” spod available in the resource without needing to venture into those areas. Can someone to confirm if that is the case. (In which case I’d wonder the value of indicating continuation of resource open at depth in that direction ... unless there is future potential thought of underground operations in the future).
